IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gig/soaktu/v29y2010i.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Monopolizing, Mutualizing, or Muddling Through: Factions and Party Management in Contemporary Thailand

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Chambers
  • Aurel Croissant

Abstract

In democracies throughout the world, intra-party factions manifest themselves in parties and governments. Formal and informal institutions have, however, proved crucial in managing factionalism. This is especially true in Thailand’s emerging parliamentary democracy where the management of factionalism has become a major objective for Thai parties. This study explores factions and factionalism as well as how different types of parties try to manage intra-party dissension especially in the case of Thailand. The findings suggest that management style tends to be a function of a party’s organization, with parties which practice a collegial style tending to be the more successful in controlling intra-party cliques over time. At the same time, the most important tools which party leaderships can use to control factions are the careful use of constitutional provisions and manipulation of party finance.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Chambers & Aurel Croissant, 2010. "Monopolizing, Mutualizing, or Muddling Through: Factions and Party Management in Contemporary Thailand," Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, Institute of Asian Studies, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg, vol. 29(3), pages 3-33.
    • Handle: RePEc:gig:soaktu:v:29:y:2010:i:
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hup.sub.uni-hamburg.de/giga/jsaa/article/view/291
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tsebelis, George, 1995. "Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism and Multipartyism," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(3), pages 289-325, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Veerayooth Kanchoochat, 2014. "Coalition Politics and Reform Dynamics in Thailand," GRIPS Discussion Papers 13-26, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    2. Veerayooth Kanchoochat, 2023. "Siamese Twin Troubles: Structural and Regulatory Transformations in Unequal Thailand," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 18(1), pages 47-68, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sobel, Andrew C., 2002. "State institutions, risk, and lending in global capital markets," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 11(6), pages 725-752, December.
    2. Kari Irwin Otteburn, 2023. "All in favour? Indian business interests and the India-EU FTA," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 311-329, September.
    3. Benjamin Larin & Bernd Süssmuth, 2014. "Fiscal Autonomy and Fiscal Sustainability: Subnational Taxation and Public Indebtedness in Contemporary Spain," CESifo Working Paper Series 4726, CESifo.
    4. Pablo T. Spiller, 2003. "The Institutional Foundations of Public Policy: A Transactions Approach with Application to Argentina," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 281-306, October.
    5. Heike Klüver & Iñaki Sagarzazu, 2013. "Ideological congruency and decision-making speed: The effect of partisanship across European Union institutions," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(3), pages 388-407, September.
    6. Sanjeev Gupta & João Tovar Jalles, 2020. "On the Political Economy Determinants of Tax Reforms: Evidence from Developing Countries," Policy Papers 199, Center for Global Development.
    7. Markus Leibrecht & Hans Pitlik, 2014. "Generalised Trust, Institutional and Political Constraints on the Executive and Deregulation of Markets," WIFO Working Papers 481, WIFO.
    8. Prateek Goorha & Vijay Mohan, 2016. "Toward a theory of Smart Institutions," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 5(1), pages 1-23, December.
    9. Jacob M. Meyer, 2020. "Checks and Imbalances: Exploring the Links between Political Constraints and Banking Crises using Econometric Mediation," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 63(1), pages 71-96.
    10. Adam William Chalmers, 2014. "In over their heads: Public consultation, administrative capacity and legislative duration in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(4), pages 595-613, December.
    11. André Kaiser, 1997. "Types of Democracy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 9(4), pages 419-444, October.
    12. Christian Bjørnskov & Axel Dreher & Justina Fischer, 2008. "Cross-country determinants of life satisfaction: exploring different determinants across groups in society," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(1), pages 119-173, January.
    13. Alvaro Forteza & Juan S. Pereyra, 2021. "Separation of powers with ideological parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 33(3), pages 333-382, July.
    14. Rasmus Wiese & Richard Jong-A-Pin & Jakob de Haan, 2015. "Are expenditure cuts the only effective way to achieve successful fiscal adjustment," DNB Working Papers 477, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
    15. Thomas König & Daniel Finke, 2007. "Reforming the equilibrium? Veto players and policy change in the European constitution-building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 153-176, June.
    16. Oliver Pamp, 2008. "Partisan Preferences and Political Institutions: Explaining Fiscal Retrenchment in the European Union," European Political Economy Review, European Political Economy Infrastructure Consortium, vol. 8(Spring), pages 4-39.
    17. Jin Mun Jeong & Dursun Peksen, 2019. "Domestic Institutional Constraints, Veto Players, and Sanction Effectiveness," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(1), pages 194-217, January.
    18. Feler Bose, 2010. "Parliament vs. Supreme court: a veto player framework of the Indian constitutional experiment in the area of economic and civil rights," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 336-359, December.
    19. repec:dgr:rugccs:200006 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Serguei Kaniovski, 2008. "The exact bias of the Banzhaf measure of power when votes are neither equiprobable nor independent," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(2), pages 281-300, August.
    21. Zhiyuan Wang & Hyunjin Youn, 2018. "Locating the External Source of Enforceability: Alliances, Bilateral Investment Treaties, and Foreign Direct Investment," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 99(1), pages 80-96, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gig:soaktu:v:29:y:2010:i:. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marco Bünte or Howard Loewen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dueiide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.